National Council on Disability
Cultural Diversity Advisory Committee (CDAC)
March 4, 2006 - Record of Public Meeting (Teleconference) - Minutes

Participants:  CDAC Members, Darrell K. Simmons, J.D., Elaine Mbionwu, Glenn, Jean Jerry Lang, LaDonna Shuckahosee; Michael Blatchford; Paul Leung (excused); Wendy Alegra Jones (excused); Jeff Rosen (NCD’s General Counsel/Director of Policy); Pam O’Leary, Staff Sign Language Interpreter; Gerrie Hawkins, Ph.D., (NCD’s Designated Federal Official); and Milton Aponte, J.D., (NCD Member Liaison).

1. Roll Call – DFO
2, Welcome – Mr. Aponte’, the NCD Council Liaison welcomed everyone on behalf of the National Council on Disability and thanked members for their past work.  He stated that although he has not been with the group as frequently as desired, his support for the committee’s contribution to NCD’s work has continued and he thanked members for their past work. He encouraged the members to perhaps, consider how each one might increase efforts to advise NCD on various issues. In addition, Mr. Aponte’ recounted his having  heard CDAC members’ desire for clearer integration of issues impacting people from diverse cultures across the findings, and recommendations in NCD’s research reports and related products.

3. Review of proposed agenda –After Dr. Hawkins identified the agenda items the meeting leadership was transferred to CDAC’s Chair.

4.  Business items – Darrell Simmons, CDAC Chair
(a) Meeting Purpose:  Mr. Simmons stated that the three fold meeting purpose included to: discuss concrete ways to prepare for NCD opportunities; address outreach/networking to assure perspectives are representative of people from diverse cultures around the country; and obtain update on new member recruitment.

(b) NCD Priorities: Since the members in attendance indicated having read the material provided prior to this meeting, the Chair opted to move forward with other items in the interest of time. Via e-mail last month, procedural discussion of CDAC opportunities for participation in NCD priorities (e.g., review of RFP’s review of draft documents, engage in dialogue around study topics as members of stakeholder groups, become available as a key informant for interview purposes, submit for consideration national level reputable research or related reports appropriate to the topics under study, and so forth). The DFO also indicated some agency difficulty with our web host posting information in a timely manner and a backlog reportedly limiting the prediction of when the information would be available for viewing.

(c) New Member Recruitment Update:  In response to members’ questions about the descriptions that might be shared about applicants for CDAC positions, Dr. Hawkins indicated that the array of accurate terms could include, people who self-identify as living with disabilities, people who described their many years of experience working on disability and diversity matters (5, 10, even 30 years), current or former CEOs, Executive Directors of private and/or nonprofit entities, civil rights workers, program administrators, managers, educators, researchers, advocates, independent living trainers, parent trainers, people with BA, MA, CRC, Ed. D, Ph.D., and other earned degrees, and people with clearly expressed goals and passions for addressing the multicultural needs of people with disabilities who are also from diverse racial and ethnic groups. From an estimated 150 inquiries, more than 70 completed applications were received.
 
(d) Procedural Next steps/actions for improvement of CDAC operations were
discussed, including the importance of gaining familiarity with NCD's ongoing and upcoming projects, as well as providing all members (new and continuing) with a CDAC Handbook.  Suggestions for inclusion were: NCD’s authorizing statute, links to web site, summary list of NCD publications, CDAC’s charter, mission and vision statements, guidelines for operations/functioning, suggested methods for involvement in NCD priority projects, brief bios of each member, member contact information for internal communication purposes, and a copy of the most recent Federal Advisory Committee report about CDAC. Target for a first draft will be prior to bringing new members aboard in June 2006.  Mr. Rosen added to the discussion about strategies for making material like the handbook available online was discussed and possibilities would be pursued. Staff support availability will impact the setup and updating of this type of document.  CDAC’s Chair asked the Council Liaison whether NCD had a strategic plan that the committee could use to gauge its planning, involvement, and evaluation of activities.  Mr. Aponte indicated that he was unaware of such a published plan; however, he suggested that the committee might use information about NCD’s priorities and projects to determine what areas would be of interest to CDAC members. Mr. Rosen added that  while the Council’s intend for its March 2006 quarterly meeting was to discuss development of a strategic plan, whether that translates in to a written document for publication remains to be seen. He agreed with Mr. Aponte’s description about the working process from meeting to meeting in line with NCD’s selected priorities; Mr. Rosen also offered that an internal document developed by the executive director called the annual workplan might be of interest as well. In addition, the policy team develops a policy workplan each fiscal year.  One option might be for the CDAC leader to review those two documents with the DFO and Mr. Rosen to sort out whether the documents might be helpful to the group (serve CDAC’s needs). Then we can approach the appropriate NCD Council members to obtain sharing that information because these are internal documents. Mr. Aponte also offered another option of CDAC members looking at the synopsis of the projects or studies.  Mr. Simmons indicated that the main focus of his inquiry was to enable the advisory committee to plan within the scope of NCD’s overall goals and objectives; this would give committee members a better idea of how to best utilize their own time for the benefit of carrying out the committee’s purpose.
 
            (e) In response to a question of whether NCD publishes a calendar of its RFP’s, Dr. Hawkins stated that the information can be accessed on “www.grants.gov “website. Mr. Rosen added that two new studies were posted: one on educational outcomes and the other on disability data. Dr. Fujiura inquired about future opportunity to comment on RFP development so that there is assurance of some language that asks potential contractors to address areas that are of concern to people from diverse cultures. Mr. Aponte indicated that at this time NCD has not implemented a strategy for the described type of involvement at this time; however, he surmised that NCD would need to be more alert along these lines for future research. Mr. Rosen agreed that while the development of the RFP is totally the Council’s decision making, informed input would be welcomed. On the one hand, as General Counsel, he also clarified that the Council as a federal agency must be mindful of all appearances of compromise, contribute to increased allegations of bias during the procurement phases; this imposes certain constraints on the process. On the other hand, NCD has as a track record of developing ways for appropriate involvement of people outside the Counsel who have certain expertise, insights, and so forth. yet still allow for Council control of the flow of pre-RFP announcement information.  More thought needs to be paid about how we can manage ways to keep CDAC informed in advance about opportunities for involvement and in turn for CDAC to identify members who are specifically interested in various research opportunities in the future. Opportunity seems to be before us for FY 2007 (health care study and a vocational rehabilitation study) and the NCD budget justification for 2007 can be sent to CDAC for early involvement by identifying people who are interested in the key projects. As teams are formed for those projects we can assure CDAC members’ availability will be made known to the Council member team chairs for each project; in turn the chairs will decide how best to involve advisory team members. Summary 4 ways of involvement: (1) review of proposals, (2) expert advisory groups for studies, (3) review of drafts prior to sending it to the Council, and (4) dissemination of report information. Mr. Aponte underscored the spirit of inclusion and predicts that members with appropriate expertise or perspectives will be welcomed to be involved. With respect to the importance of developing a mechanism for involvement in the RFP process, Ms. Shuckahosee commented that including as a part of the RFP some type of question(s) about how the bidder proposes to address needs of people from diverse cultures will help to raise awareness that diversity issues matter in research. The CDAC Chair asked Dr. Fujiura to serve as point person to assure timely input with NCD staff regarding RFPs and others in the future.

5. Announcements and other Member comments

The DFO thanked all members for their participation and made special mention that each members who was experiencing this as his/her final public meeting as CDAC members were invited to remain in touch with the NCD diversity network.

The next CDAC public meeting is scheduled for June 1, 2006.   

6. Adjournment – The DFO declared that the meeting was adjourned.